TNJ........... More of BG's Creative Accounting......

Part One

Personally I thought the problems with BG's accounting sheet spoke loudly to the arrogance of BG and WF. They thought they could say whatever they wanted and get away with it. The problem was when you tell lies, they come back to bite you because it's hard to keep them straight. BG did not keep his facts straight in any way shape or form on that accounting sheet.

If you noticed in the monthly accounting BG made references under a number of months that say "horse show did not affect." What that specifically means I could see by doing the math. BG had charged me for training 9 horses most months (one month of 6) for an entire week (and one month 2 weeks) in each of those months when he was gone to a horse show. None of the horses he was supposed to be working were trained during that time. Those horses were not even in his care then. Most of them were here on my farm.

Clearly he had made deductions other months for work missed because of his health and he even adjusted his totals for the week we were at regionals in June to 3 horses for that week even though he didn't work those horses. (although he charged me $100 per horse for that week when a weekly charge would have been more in line with $75).

All of these adjustments proved the man knew he was supposed to be working a 5 day work week. For some reason he thought he could get away with charging me for those days he was gone to horse shows. Whether he thought he could change the terms of our contract and charge for training or whether he was totally comfortable doing whatever he felt like BG had now decided he should get paid for training horses even when he was gone, like other trainers do, despite was our original agreement said.

That, however, was not what our contract stated with training at the rate of $300 per month working 5 days a week, what it means is pretty clear and,like I said above, his actions applying a credit for sick days etc, suggests he knows that. These terms may not be the standard for the industry for training but it was one of the terms of our contract. BG even clearly stated those terms in his own court documents.

I might add that it is also not standard in the industry for the owner to be hauling the horses TO the trainer to be worked. Normally, horses in training are housed with the trainer so even if the trainer is gone to a show, the trainer is still responsible for them. Those horse should still be being cared for and exercised by someone. That was not the case here. The horses were being housed here at my farm. If I was gone, my family was caring for these horses. That's one of the reasons that provision for a 5 day work week was important to me.

I would never have agreed to the contract without that provision. BG didn't have the right to change it without my approval. The law clearly states changes can only be made with the approval of both parties. BG needed those numbers to say the horse had been paid for even though he hadn't done the work. The fact he had indicated so boldly *horse show does not affect clearly suggests BG didn't feel the need to play by the rules.

In addition to these weeks when we were all gone to horse shows, there was a week where BG and WF were gone to a horse show in Oregon that I did not attend. I worked all of my horses myself while he was gone, yet BG charged me for 9 horses worked that week as well so that month instead of working horses for 4 weeks he had worked them for only two, if that, and he'd still charged me for a full month for each of those 9 horses.

To document for the court that WF had been to the show and I hadn't, I had show records for both or us. I was also prepared to get a statement from the show secretary that I had not participated in that show and that both BG and WF had been there. In addition I had records for all the shows we had attended to prove that we were gone so my young horses could not have been trained during that time.

In addition to the horse shows he charged me for working horses when he was gone, he also charge me for working horses when I was gone to the two horses shows I managed for the Morgan Horse Club of Washington. Because I was gone, I was not hauling horses to his farm so my horses were not worked and he sure didn't come here to work them, despite what he may have claimed. I had documents like the prize list , emails from USEF and receipts for my expenses at those shows including my hotel room substantiating I had indeed been the show manager for that show and out of town for the entire week.

I also had BG's own accounting sheet saying that he had worked horses for me when I was out of town that shows he knows I was gone. However, he did not make an adjustment for me being gone on the contrary, he added an additional charge for those days. That would show his tendencies double dipping. We would see those again.

I printed out show records of the horses from his barn to prove that we were on the road. I had statements of witnesses that the horses BG was training were here on my farm and not being trained and that BG has not every worked horses on my farm.

Overall BG charged me $4350 for training when either he or I were gone to horse shows and no training was done. Not a huge sum but as you can see when you begin to add up the cost of all these ways BG padded what he was owed, the total gets to be pretty hefty. $2400 for Dandy, $6300 for conditioning halter horses, added to this $4350 and we're already up to $13,500. That total excludes an adjustment for the pen which would bring up to $14,400.

We haven't even gotten to the really BIG issues yet and these figures still give BG more than his due because he really didn't have that board coming at all and he sure didn't have 9 months worth of time a horse was in that pen. BG's accounting of training and that board for the pen at this point as been whittled down from $32,000 to about $18,000. We still have those additional charges on the last page to contend with and, of course, all of the other days besides horse shows that BG did not work horses.

Obviously, for breach of contract, I could have stopped at this point. The purchase price of the horse was $30,000 and BG did not do that much work. I had disproved enough of what BG's accounting to have the amount of money well below what he owed for the horse.

However, I was not willing to put my eggs all in just those baskets despite how obvious I thought they were. I wanted to be sure the court understood each and every thing that BG and WF did to try to steal my horse from me.

I believe the big picture is what exposes BG and WF as the frauds they are. A thing here and one there could easily be written off as a misunderstanding BUT when you put this whole thing together it just boggles the mind. I was counting on that so the court would be able to the maliciousness of their actions and what kind of effect it had on me, my family, my horses and my business. I was no longer just looking to get my horse back. I wanted what I was entitled to having been wronged in this manner and that meant damages.

To be continued.............

BG's Just in Case Sheet....

This is another picture of Dandy at about 6 weeks old, I think. You can still see that attitude is still there although I promise he really was enjoying that hug. He used to run up to me and lean against me to get me to hug him. It's a good thing he stopped that.


Visit Blog Village and vote daily for this blog Here They are now measuring the rankings by votes out, so if you find my blog on the site, please click that link too to improve my rankings. TY